WHY I SWITCHED TO THE WAHOO ELEMNT BOLT

I bought the Wahoo ELEMNT BOLT to add to my collection of head units that help me compare power meters side by side. Little did I know then that the BOLT would become the one I keep on my bike when testing time is over. It has replaced the Garmin Edge 520 as my preferred bike computer.

True, the 520 is better than other Garmins in the Edge line and far better than the non-Garmins in my collection – a Joule GPS, Wahoo RFLKT+ and Suunto Movestick for my laptop. But there are things Garmin can do better with the 520. Plenty of them.

Wahoo may be better known for their trainers but the BOLT isn’t Wahoo’s first rodeo in head units. Their previous RFLKT, RFLK+ and ELEMNT head units were very innovative and well priced but couldn’t quite compete with Garmin in the end for a variety of reasons.

With the Wahoo ELEMNT BOLT, Wahoo has exploited the Edge 520’s shortcomings and matching many of the features where Garmin Edge units excel. For me, and I would expect most road cycling enthusiasts, the BOLT is a clear winner over the 520 in almost every way that matters.

[Note: Wahoo calls the BOLT by its full name, the Wahoo ELEMNT BOLT. The company also makes the Wahoo ELEMNT, an almost smartphone-sized predecessor to the Wahoo ELEMNT BOLT. The two units operate the same way and that is probably why Wahoo uses the ELEMNT in both names.

But, I find the two Wahoo model names confusing. Garmin is clearer. Their Edge units have different model numbers after each use of the Edge name (Edge 520, Edge 820, Edge 1000).

To avoid confusion among the Wahooligans, I’m calling the Wahoo ELEMNT BOLT just the BOLT going forward.

And, Garmin upped it’s 520 game when it replaced it with the 520 PLUS which I will call the 520 going forward]

Among the things I believe matter most in choosing a head unit, here are the ways the BOLT and 520 differ and where the BOLT almost always comes out on top.

SCREEN

While the two units have the same physical and screen size, the BOLT’s screen is sharper and brighter than the 520. For a middle-aged, far-sighted fart like me who needs 1.50+ magnification glasses for computer and reading distances, I find the BOLT’s screen far easier to read and a difference maker between the two units.

Garmin Edge 520 and Wahoo Bolt

The BOLT’s sharper and brighter screen is notable when the font size of the numbers is the same. But, even better, you can change the font size on the BOLT merely by toggling the up/down buttons on the right to decrease or increase the number of fields you have on the screen.

Even better still, the top field number is always larger than the others as you go up and down from 3 to 7 fields on the screen. And as you go from more to fewer fields, all the numbers get larger. With the 520, it always seems like there is a lot of white space and wasted real-estate on the display.

If you like to focus on one number to guide you as you ride – perhaps your speed or cadence or, in my case, my average 3-second power – this larger top number stands out that much more while the other numbers that matter to you are clear and just below it.

You can change the font size and number of fields on the 520 but you have to set up a different page to do that. With the BOLT, you change the number and size of the fields within the page you already have set up. In both units, you have a limited number of pages. With the BOLT, however, you don’t need to add pages or change between them nearly as often as you do in the 520 to get the same info.

Finally, I find the BOLT screen sharp and bright enough that I don’t need to use any backlight riding outside during the day and with the room lights turned on while on a trainer. I usually have the 520 set to at least 80% brightness with a 15-second timeout and often find myself toggling between pages just to turn the backlight on. BOLT’s advantage here obviously saves battery when you do toggle within or between pages. It also saves you the need to toggle as often and keeps both hands on the bars when riding outside.

BUTTONS

The buttons on the BOLT make a lot more sense and I find are far more intuitive than on the 520.

The on/off button on both head units is on the upper left. That makes sense as that location is the least natural spot to put a button for the right-hand dominated world on a ride (sorry lefties). You’ll use it once or twice before you set off on your ride (on, then off or only on if you leave it alone and let it turn off by itself) unless you want to change settings mid-ride which I don’t suggest you do while underway.

What makes less sense is that the 520 has the up/down buttons many will use frequently to switch pages during a ride on the lower left side of the unit as well.

Bolt (black) and 520 (white) left, center and right buttons

Not only do you need to use your left hand to do this, you need to take that same hand away from the area of the left hand STI (aka shifter/brake levers, aka brifter). This is the side where you control the front brake on most bikes, the brake you should use first when slowing your bike.

Further, you are taking your hand off that lever AND probably looking at your head unit to see the results of the page changed you’ve made, truly a bad combination when you should be looking at the road and all that is going on around you. (Sorry Mr. Froome).

The BOLT has those up/down buttons on the right-hand side. That favors right handed riders and takes you away from your secondary, rear brake. The BOLT’s up/down buttons only change how many fields see on the screen when you are in a page. Theoretically, then, you would use those buttons less often.

The buttons that change the page you are on, start/pause/resume a ride, start a new lap and confirm certain actions (yes or no) are on the top of the BOLT just below the screen. They also have labels just above them on the screen though are in a font size a bit too small for somewhat visually challenged, middle-aged riders like me to see.

The placement of these BOLT buttons is a superior design to the 520 where the start/pause/resume and lap buttons are on the lower edge of the unit, 90 degrees to the bottom the screen. With some out-front mounts including a couple I’ve used, there’s not a lot of room for your thumb between the buttons and the handlebar.

I do find the 520s physical buttons to be an improvement over the touchscreen ones on other Edge units but they still aren’t ergonomically well positioned for me. The BOLT buttons, however, are more natural and more logically placed.

It’s like a Google shopping search, but just for road cycling enthusiasts

You’ll save yourself time and money while supporting In The Know Cycling

SETUP

BOLT takes advantage of the touchscreen on your smartphone to make finding your sensors and customizing pages easy peasy. You can drag-and-drop the fields you want to the pages you want. You can reorganize the order of the fields within a page, in the same way, dragging and dropping them on your phone. You can find, save or delete sensors in the same drag-and-drop way. The changes show up almost immediately on your BOLT screen.

You can also add and save sensors on the BOLT itself but doing it on the phone is that much easier.

The first time I did hill repeats with the BOLT, I stopped at the top of the first repeat, pulled out my phone and added and reordered the fields on my lap page. Took me about a minute. (I wish it had taken longer. I needed an excuse to catch my breath.)

Setting up the 520 isn’t hard (setting up a Joule GPS is way harder), but it’s a series of button pushes back and forth. One could get some serious callouses doing that.

In the touch screen phone world we live in, BOLT is hip and the 520 is old school or the BOLT is dope and the 520 is whack or whatever words hipper enthusiasts than me actually use.

All of this assumes you are an iPhone or Android smartphone user. You need to use the Wahoo ELEMNT app to set up your phone even though you don’t need to ride with it to make it work.

I haven’t done a side by side comparison but both the BOLT and 520 have tons of fields to choose from. There weren’t any fields I wanted that I couldn’t find on either

In Garmin’s favor, the 520 triggers a reminder on your screen you zero-offset your power meter when you wake it up. With the BOLT, you don’t get a reminder. You have to open the menu (push the on-off button once), highlight the power meter in your sensor list (scroll to it with the down button) and push the calibrate button (left button on the front of your screen.) You should zero-offset once your bike is at the outside temperature at the beginning of each ride. That was your reminder.

The 520 also tells you what power zone you are in with 1 decimal place while the BOLT only gives you the integer number. Being in Zone 3.2 is a whole lot different than being in 3.8. Being in Zone 3 doesn’t tell me enough. I hope BOLT improves on this.

BOLT does have a set of colored LEDs across the top that can give you a quick glimpse of your instantaneous power zone. I find this complements the smoothed average power and zone info I use. Those same LEDs can be set to show you what heart rate zone you are in and whether you are going faster, slower or near your average speed. These are helpful if not revolutionary innovations.

You can also connect the BOLT with sensors using ANT+ and Bluetooth while Garmin only connects with ANT+. That’s a partial advantage for the BOLT; I find ANT+ is a more robust protocol and I connect power meters and other sensors using ANT+ when I can.

While I’m not a smart trainer user, I’m also told the BOLT does a superior job of communicating with and controlling your trainer. (Makes sense. Wahoo also makes trainers.) It avoids the need to use 3rd party software to run between the head unit and trainer to control the resistance. If that is important to you, there’s another check for the BOLT.

While not the case when the BOLT first came out, structured workouts you have created on Training Peaks and Today’s Plan can be loaded into both the BOLT and the 520.

There are all sorts of other features, bells and whistles, boops, and bops that the BOLT and 520 have, some of which may appeal to you or not. None are game changers or decision makers for me or do I think they would be for most road cycling enthusiasts.

BATTERY

Quite simply, the BOLT battery lasts much longer than the 520. Using them side by side on a recent century ride with the GPS maps on in both units, the BOLT had about 1/3rd of its battery left while the 520 was nearly tapped out. Other reviewers have noted as much as a 2X to 3X longer battery life for the BOLT over the 520.

In most of my riding, battery life isn’t an issue. I make a habit of plugging in my lights and any head units I’ve been using during the week every Sunday. They usually have enough charge to last through a regular week of 6-8 hours of riding.

If I’m going on a 100 mile or longer ride with the 520 where I want to use the GPS to help me navigate the course, I’ve learned to turn the display brightness down. To conserve battery, I’ll also shut off the navigation when I don’t need it. One of my friends brings one of the lipstick-sized batteries along, plugs it into the 520 and tapes it to his bars.

With the BOLT, I no longer need to worry about any of that.

NAVIGATION

I ride a lot of regular routes I know where I don’t need or use the GPS navigation feature. When I head out on a group ride or do a smaller event ride though, I do use navigation because it’s often a route I haven’t ridden. I like the confidence of knowing where I need to make the next turn especially if (when?) I fall off the back.

The Garmin Edge 520 Plus added considerably to the maps that were available on the 520 (essentially none – you had to download open source maps). It’s a robust set of route maps that also include off-road maps in some cases for gravel riding navigation.

The BOLT comes with detailed maps through the ELEMNT smartphone app and enables turn notification out of the box. With the early versions of the Plus, the Garmin included maps had a tendency to overwhelm the processor in places where you need to navigate multiple turns in a small area. The result was that notifications came after the point where you were supposed to make some turns. I suspect that got worked out with firmware updates though I can’t say for sure.

From there, there is a bit of divergence in their navigation approach.

To start a route on the 520, you need to push buttons on either edge of the unit through four menus (Menu>Training>Courses>Course Option) including some up-down scrolling to get to your course. Try remembering that sequence when you are hustling to get to the start of a ride.

With the BOLT, you hit the page button at the bottom of the screen until the map page comes up (usually one push the workout page the BOLT initially powers to). Then you push the route button also at the bottom of the screen on that page and scroll down and enter your route. Intuitive. Done. Worry about other things.

BOLT also puts the most recently entered route at the top of your list. The 520 puts them in alphanumeric and alphabetical order. If you are doing Wicked Right for the first time (shame) and just loaded it, the route will be at the top of your BOLT list. On the 520, you might need to scroll through 15 other rides to get to it. (Pro Tip: Scroll up to get to the bottom of your list on the 520).

The 520 has a color screen, uses a distinct color to show what road you should ride on and a distinct arrow to show where you should make the upcoming turns. The BOLT’s screen is black and white and an arrow to show you the route and turns. PotAto – PotAHto.

When underway, the BOLT also creates a cascade of arrows I find is superior to the colored line on the 520. I wasn’t able to take a picture while underway (no Go Pro) so here’s a screen grab from the Wahoo site of what you’ll see while riding.

Using the up/down button on the BOLT, you can zoom in and zoom out the map to get a higher level or more granular view of where you are in relationship to the roads around you and your upcoming turn. I find this feature in combination with the cascading arrows especially helpful when trying to decide which turn to take at more complicated intersections where you might have two or three roads leading in and out of it.

Another plus for the BOLT is how its turn navigation interacts with the ride data. If you have a page up on the 520 with your regular array of performance fields and come to a turn, the turn notification street name and arrow will overlay the data fields on the bottom third or so of the screen. So, for example, if you have heart rate and speed as the bottom two fields of the six on your screen, you won’t be able to see that for the quarter mile or so period from when the notification turns on until it goes off after exiting the turn.

The BOLT merely adds the turn notification to the bottom as if it was two additional fields while shifting the other performance fields up the screen and keeping them fully visible. This is like going from 5 to 7 fields. The 5 fields you were looking at before shift up and get a bit smaller and the turn information shows up at the bottom. Once you exit the turn, the performance fields shift down again.

When you get a phone or text notification, the field shifting versus field covering works the same way on the BOLT versus the 520.

Seems like a small thing but I always hated the way the 520 covered up a couple of my fields and immediately noticed and smiled with satisfaction when I realized they were still there on the BOLT.

Anecdotally, the BOLT does somehow seem to notify you of turns earlier than the 520. I’ve done a fair amount of comparison riding with the BOLT and 520 and alongside others in my club who have a Garmin and noticed this to be the case fairly consistently. We wondered how this could be since we figured there are likely only one or two navigation chipsets out there and expect they would act the same way when responding to the same GPS satellite. Software differences? Black box stuff?

The BOLT does lack the ability to route you back on course the way the 520 does. You get all sorts of beeps when you go off course with the BOLT so you have little excuse to turn things around and get going in the right direction. I expect a software upgrade at some point would also bring BOLT on par with the 520 for this capability. Certainly hope so.

To end this section at the start, there is one huge difference between the two head units when it comes to loading a route. It’s called wireless.

With the 520, you need to download the route file to your computer, plug the 520 into your computer, and then upload the route file to a right folder in the Garmin folder list. God forbid you can’t find or lose the Garmin USB to micro USB cord (many generic ones will charge but not communicate with your 520) or upload the route file to the wrong folder. (Choose the folder called New Files rather than any of more than 20 others including those called Courses, Custom Maps, Locations, and Workouts, all of which sound like reasonable places to put your route file).

My riding buddy Davo Mac, a guy with one of the sunniest dispositions I know recently entertained a group of us with a 5-minute rant about many of these Garmin ways of doing things from the breadcrumb map starting point down through the route file uploading. He topped it off with an expression of his dissatisfaction (I’ll leave it at that) that Garmin, the giant leader in bike, auto, marine and other navigation segments could have so many shortcomings in their system.

An industry giant’s weaknesses often provide opportunities for a newcomer’s innovation.

With this one route file uploading example (let alone the others I’ve gone through above it), BOLT has demonstrated how they innovate to make a better product. Once your route file is up on your RideWithGPS or Strava Routes, you merely turn on your BOLT, push the Route button on your maps page and hit Sync. WiFi moves the file onto your BOLT from there. Magic.

Note that if you load up from Strava routes you don’t get turn notification. But RideWithGPS is so much better in so many ways I wouldn’t use Strava for uploading routes. The BOLT does play very nice with Strava in some of their signature features like Live Segments.

Speaking of which, you may recall Garmin tried to blunt the breakaway popularity of Strava segments and didn’t integrate with their Edge units for some time. Worse, they embarrassed themselves with their own segments offering which has never caught on. Needless to say, Garmin’s Edge units and Strava segments don’t work anywhere near “seamlessly”.

If you are out riding with your phone (and who doesn’t these days), you can also plug an address into the ELEMNT app and have a route automatically created and synced to your BOLT. Nice

RESULTS

Both the BOLT and 520 will upload your results to Strava, TrainingPeaks, Today’s Plan and other apps that capture and analyze your results.

I don’t know about you, but I want to know my results well before I get to those apps. Like, right away.

Here, the BOLT really excels. The completeness, organization, and presentation of the data are so much better on the BOLT than the 520. It’s also better than the results displays you can get on your Strava and TrainingPeaks phone apps. I hardly feel the need to dig into my TrainingPeaks computer program more than once a week.

Here are a couple comparisons of the presentation of results (from different rides) including a couple to the far right with Zone details that are only available with the BOLT

PRICE

In the US, the BOLT sells for USD $250 and the 520 Plus at $280. In the UK, the two sell at the same price of £200. When buying in Euros, the BOLT, at about €240, sells for about €10 less than the 520 Plus.

You can go to these search results at Know’s Shop to see where you can buy the BOLT and compare prices from stores I recommend because they have the best prices, customer satisfaction records, and selection on enthusiast-level cycling gear and kit.

In The Know Cycling supports you by doing hours of independent and comparative evaluations to find and recommend the best road cycling gear and kit to improve your riding experience.

You can support the site and save yourself time and money when you buy through the links in the posts and at Know’s Shop to stores I rank among the best for their low prices and high customer satisfaction, some which pay a commission that helps cover our review and site costs.

Thank you for reading. Please let me know what you think of anything I’ve written or ask any questions you might have in the comment section below.

And please, let’s stay connected! Using the widgets in the right-hand column, you can sign up to get an email when new posts come out, follow on Twitter and Facebook, and get posts sent to your RSS reader.

94 comments

Wahoo Element / Bolt
Hello, I read the detailed instructions directly on the manufacturer’s site. Even though it is quite extensive, it is not quite detailed,
as is customary in classic cyclocomputers or sporttesters.

1. Functions – not all functions are decomposed. Four features are highlighted in the description – I’ve heard another 8 features.
Certainly these meters are packed with a lot of features.
2. The LAP function (peaks, split times). There is no indication of how many times it can handle (100, 200 ..) at all. I also do not know,
what I will see when I open individual LAPs in history. What data will show me. And if I know these figures
self-select and paste.
3. Language-do not know whether it has Czech or Slovak language. When BORA is already there and there are both Slovak and Czech racers there.
4. Even though I think yes, compatibility with Watt meters in cranks (SRM, Garmin, Rotor, Powertap …) is not written
Also, it is not written whether it is possible to combine it with Watt meters in the chest belt, for use in other sports
like cycling – running, cross-country, inline, swimming …
5. Bracelets – I can not find out if bracelets are available for placing the meter on the wrist or on the shoulder.

6. What I learned from the net: Navigation does not have street names when you get off the route – you can not get back.
Very large differences in altitude, temperature, and percentages of climbing and falling.
Inaccurate info about the power zone. Being in zone 3 is not exactly accurate. Others refer to 3.2 – 3.8

Kamil, With the usefulness of the Internet, I’ve noticed most product companies have put much less info in their “user manual” over the last 10-20 years. Electronics companies, and certainly cycling electronics companies are certainly doing this. Instead, they are a) making their products more intuitive and self-guided and b) using support pages on their websites or chat services available to answer their questions. Wahoo does a good job of both of these. Go to https://support.wahoofitness.com/hc/en-us to access them. I’d expect your detailed questions can all be answered there. From what I know/my experience, here are my answers to some of your questions
1. Functions – All the features nearly all road cycling enthusiasts would need are available in the Bolt
2. LAP – That’s a lot of laps! Don’t know the limit but I’d expect the Bolt will give you all the laps you need for a given workout. Not sure I understand your questions about self-select and paste. When I open my lap display, it shows me the laps by number in order of the laps starting from the first time I hit the lap button
3. Languages – Don’t know about Czech or Slovak. Wahoo support would certainly know. You English is quite good though.
4. Compatibility – Bolt is compatible with any ANT+ and Bluetooth sensor, regardless of what powermeter, speed, cadence, HR monitor or other devices as long it is communicating via ANT+ or Bluetooth
5. Bracelets – I’ve not seen bracelets that hold the Bolt provided by Wahoo. Perhaps a 3rd party provider makes one. Perhaps a market opportunity for someone? Then again, I’ve never seen anyone wear a bike computer on their wrist.
6. Navigation – Bolt shows the street name in the turn-by-turn directions. And yes, it will not navigate you back on course if you go off. It will tell you are off course. When this happens to me, I simply turn around and return to where I made the wrong turn. I haven’t had the experience the “very large differences” you describe about altitude, temp and pitch. I rode the BOLT side by side with the Garmin for several thousand miles. They each put out slightly different numbers because they operate slightly differently. Hard to know if one or either is exactly right but neither is very far off the other on a percentage basis. You may prefer a bit more precision than modern day head units/GPS units offer. And while zone 3 is accurate, knowing that you are at 3.2 or 3.8 is more precise and desirable. I’ve asked Wahoo about this myself and they currently have no plans to add a decimal place. But, if enough people ask for it, I’d expect they could/would provide it.

Hi, Steve. Your info is valuable to us. I have answers from Wahoo. It has a maximum of 65 LAPS. No more needed. A 32 start or sprint can be done. (64 LAPS). Functions can choose anyone they want from 172 options. Other manufacturers do not offer it for LAPS.

Accordingly, a hand strap can be attached to the stem holder.
I’m doing biking and racing in-line speed skating. Winter run and skiing.
Now I have the Garmin Forerunner 310 XT HR. I need something new. Bolt has somewhat larger dimensions. But still on wrist. The options they provide me are incomparable.

Hi Steve, great article and I couldn´t agree more. I am riding the Bolt since August and am fully satisfied with how it performs. As I am quite new to cycling, this is only my second head unit, after a Polar 450, which was ok, but of course a lot less complete (and a lot less expensive). So I cannot comment much on Garmin, but observing the hiccups my riding buddies have with their products (dead batteries, just refusing to come on again after a break mid-ride, ..) I am very happy with the unit and so far it never let me down. Cheers, Eckhard

I am new to cycle computers but not to Garmin and not to activity tracking. Garmins UI has been garbage for at least 5 years and it did not improve with the 520. I had already decided to switch to the Bolt after reading your article and used Competitive Cyclist through this blog, please collect your reward.
I wanted to add an experience that I had today. I am comparing efforts between a bike I am borrowing and a bike I own to determine if it is worth upgrading my equipment. Mid ride I stopped to clear mud from my bike and shoes, we have sticky mud here. The 520 turned itself off and when I resumed my ride it had no information from the first half of the ride.
Good bye Garmin and hello Wahoo.

Having just bought a bolt, I am very disappointed to find planned workouts can only be loaded via two other websites, must be loaded within one day of ride unless you pay fees to training peaks, will auto delete anything less than one or more than 5 days out, so you can’t keep a workout library on the device unless you pay training peaks, or do it daily and hope training peaks benevolence for this free account feature lasts the life of your bolt. It is absurd. Workout files are a few lines of text of time and intensity target. What I’ve learned is that wahoo completely cut off option for you to load and store what you want just prior to last fall rollout. They preload it with three total workouts and thats it. No access via usb and unless they integrate you into the phone app, no path to load. My understanding is Garmin does not have these limitations so as much as I like many things about BOLT, it’s likely going back at end of return period unless they enable direct user access.

Any guidance one power meter compatibility with the Wahoo? (I own the original elemnt) – I’m looking at the assioma and garmin 3s pedal systems and I’m wondering if the garmin won’t function to its full potential since I don’t use a garmin head unit.

David, Garmin Vector does some unique pedal analytics you can only see on a Garmin head unit. Not sure if those analytics are of any value for most road cycling enthusiasts but I value the Bolt benefits over the Garmin analytics. You might want to look at my power meter review for more on the analytics offered and whether you think you need them. Both the Bolt and Edge see all the data the Assioma offers. Steve

My Elemnt has poor altitude detection, usually very delayed and sometimes even backwards, can’t seem to tell the direction of grade. Wahoo first offered to replace it then told me that I bought it from “unauthorized” retailer despite it being new and registered with them. Will NEVER buy another wahoo product again. Too many bugs, and it’s plain UGLY.

I’m really annoyed that Wahoo does not count laps , really annoying in 12 hour events . I see my fellow riders all have auto lap count on there units . If I had realised this earlier , this would have been a deal breaker for me .

Just used a Bolt for the first time after long time Garmin users. Some observations:
1) It doesnt offer an auto calibrate for power meters and doesn’t ask about crank length? Does it matter?
2) I’d like to see the lap screen before having to click lap
3) You cant remove the climbing graph even if you dont like it
4) The Di2 integration is very limited, only offer standard pre determined use of buttons and no battery field (can find in menu)
5) Lose the lap button when a strava segment comes up (like to start a lap on a climd), and lose use of the page switch buttons on Di2 as it mimics what changed on screen/device with strava segments
6) Can move new pages (custom) closer to the front, have to skip strava segments screen etc

Alex, The Bolt is not a Garmin so it does do things a little differently. Kind of like switching from a PC to an Apple or iPhone to a Samsung. The operating systems aren’t the same. I’m not a techie so you may want to consult Wahoo tech support on some of these things. Here’s what I do know
1) It doesn’t pop up auto calibrate. You should set crank length in your power meter app (e.g. Stages).
2) The lap screen comes up when you start your first lap. You can then toggle between that screen and any others you’ve preset.
3) Not sure what you are referring to as “the climbing graph”
4),5),6) Don’t use it for Di2 integration or Strava segments. Check with tech support on these things. I’d expect you aren’t to first to ask about these things.

My Gamin Edge 510 has shut off mid-ride twice in the last month so it’s going to go into a drawer. Like what I’m reading about the Bolt, but my handle bars are not round. Is this going to be a problem with a mount for it? I’ve used a couple of mounts with the Garmin with no issues. Thank you.

Appreciate the quick response Steve and thanks. I’m guessing that the out front mount will work just fine anyway. I’ve been looking for an excuse to get off the Garmin train, so many bugs through the years and it appears the Bolt is certainly worth giving a try.

Anyone know if there’s a new model of the bolt coming out any time soon? I’m about ready to switch from my 510 but am happy to wait if there will be a new one in the next year. Especially if it will involve a color screen. Thanks!

Steve, there are quite a few reports from BOLT users claiming they have issues with ANT+ and BLE sensors dropping mid ride, and not reconnecting back unless head unit is restarted.
Do you experience anything like that?

Vitaliy, I read about an issue recently with an interoperability issue between BOLT and Assioma power meter pedals causing dropped readings. A recent firmware update appears to have fixed the problem. Coincidentally, I used that combination for about a year and never had an issue.

There’s like to be compatibility issues between newer power meters or others sensors with Wahoo and Garmin units from time to time. Typically, both Wahoo and Garmin are keen to resolve them. The best approach is to regularly update your firmware and take everything you read on forums with a grain of dated salt. Grain of salt because it could be a lot of things that cause a drop-out issue from low battery to inoperability to who knows what or no issue at all. Dated because if it is a real, identified, non-isolated issue, developers will likely resolve it in time. Steve

Thank you for quick response Steve!!! Highly appreciate your reviews and advises.
I have one question about data fields on ELEMNT… is it possible to show current and average speed/HR/cadence/power in same field? I use third party apps on Garmin EDGE for that, and found it very useful

I don’t see a difference in a “within field” vs. side by side field display, but no, the Wahoo doesn’t display it the way your link shows.

Frankly, your questions suggest you are a committed Garmin user looking for reasons to rule out the BOLT in the same way an iPhone user has a hard time switching to a Samsung of vice-versa especially if they’ve developed a comfort level with the operating system or an affinity for the third-party apps.

While they do most of the same things, the Garmin and Wahoo devices do them differently. I gave you the reasons why I find Wahoo does the mainstream things that most road cycling enthusiasts would want from a GPS better. If those things don’t matter to you or matter as much as the things you prefer or have built a comfort level with Garmin, then by all means, stay with Garmin.

I wouldn’t call myself committed Garmin user, but I used different EDGEs from 500 to 1030 over the years and did get used to some of the features. I was curios to see if I can configure BOLT similar to Garmin, if not – not a deal breaker. Functionality and reliability means more to me than custom data field. Very exited to try it out, and hope BOLT has less issues than Garmin does. My elemnt should be delivered today 😉
Thanks again Steve for all your work and time to answer questions!

Hey Steve, I’m also hopping of Garmin Train. I just cant decide between bolt and the regular Elemnt. I undertsand the only differences are screen size, a bit of battery life, and the extra row of LEDs. What do I do???

Adam, It’s a personal thing really. I find the full sized Elemnt a bit large and distracting for my tastes. It’s kind of like putting a full-size smartphone on your handlebars. If you are into a lot of navigation and are coming from an Edge 1000 or older Edge 800 series, then you’ll be comfortable with it. On the other hand, if you are coming from an Edge 500 or lesser series, the BOLT will be more similar except the display is better and the fonts are larger so it is much more visible. Steve

I’m a long time Garmin user (most recently 1000) but last fall switched to a Bolt on my new Emonda. Overall I’ve been really happy with it and especially like how easy it is to adjust menus and integrate RideWithGPS routes. I’ve had no issues with my Quarq DZero powermeter connecting but initially had problems with Wahoo Tickr. I ended up using my Mio wrist HR strap for a while before trying the Tickr again several months later. It may have been due to a firmware update, but the Tickr issued were resolved.

One big drawback is if you like the Garmin Varia rear light/radar. I recently picked this up and find it super useful. However because I have a Bolt, I had to mount the separate Garmin display for the Varia on my stem. Wahoo could add support for the Varia, but given that it a Garmin product it seems they are not wanting to.

Agree with the comments regarding Di2 functionality, it’s really limited on the Bolt. I think there are a lot more options with Di2 and Garmin.

I have a LG V20 phone. I have to reboot it before it will connect the Bolt. I suspect this is an issue with my phone and not the Bolt, but it is a bit of a weird glitch.

Kuttermax, Thanks for your report. Surprised to hear about issues with the Tickr and Bolt connecting as they are both Wahoo products. I’ve got two Tickrs and switch back and forth between them on my BOLT without issue. That’s something a call to Wahoo support should resolve pretty quickly.

As to the Garmin Varia, my guess would be Garmin sees the Varia as something that provides Garmin’s GPS units an advantage over Wahoo and doesn’t want to share the technology or license it to them more so than Wahoo not wanting to support it. Garmin is in a battle on multiple fronts with firms like Wahoo and Strava so comes up with products and technology like the Varia or Garmin Connect which don’t integrate with other GPS units. Garmin also didn’t work with Strava for a long time and even came up with their own segments system as a way to try to compete with them.

Agree with you on the Di2 functionality. Wahoo is still catching up on that one. Steve

I have had no issues with the smaller size of the Bolt as compared to the Garmin 1000. If you like a ton of data fields displayed at once though, then things can start to get pretty small. Typically on a road ride I like to focus on 3s power, HR, speed, distance, and time. I set the zoom so that I can see those easy. I keep some of the other data fields hidden and then “zoom out” if I want to set them, or flip to another page.

In the post below Vitaliy has some really great points comparing the Edge 1030 to the Bolt. They are very different computers and have big differences in capabilities.

I still use my Garmin 1000 for mountain biking. There are some users of the Bolt who have found the GPS accuracy is poor under tree cover and is much better on the Garmin when GPS+Glonass is used, so for mountain biking a Garmin might be the better option. I have never compared the two in this regard and have kept the Bolt on my Emonda road bike. Another reason I like the Garmin for mountain bike is that I’ve started using some of the apps like Trailforks. I use dynamicWatch to be able to wireless sync rides to the Garmin, so I don’t have to go through the hassle of connecting it to my PC directly. For mountain bike I also like a little more data displayed, like IF, % grade, etc, so the larger screen on the 1000 is nice.

Ultimately if you want a streamlined computer that works really well and it pretty budget friendly, the Bolt is a great option. However if you really want all the bells and whistles, then the Garmin 1030 is likely still the king of the hill.

For what it worth.. My latest Garmin is 1030, out of curiosity I purchased Bolt and used it for about two weeks. I do acknowledge 1030 and Bolt are in two different categories, but want to share my thoughts anyway… Bolt is much easier and faster to set up via phone app, but once Garmin all set I didn’t really have to change data fields WIFi seems to be more reliable on Bolt, connecting sensors was no problem on either one. Bolt is much smaller and more aero, if it’s your thing. Both screens are very easy to read in the dark and bright sunlight. LEDs on bolt are nice, but almost unusable on sunny days. I just couldn’t see them. Bigger screen and font on Edge make it easier to read data, if your vision is decreasing as mine take a note. It is possible to zoom in on Wahoo, but it means you will loose some of data fields. Third party apps on Edge are very nice addition! The biggest thing I was missing on Bolt is Varia radar compatibility, and probably because of that Edge would be still my device of choice on longer weekends rides. I might keep bolt for MTB rides, I think I more likely to crash on dirt and Bolt is less than half price of 1030 when I bought it Bottom line if you have Garmin and it works without issues – keep it. If your Garmin giving you a hard time, go ahead and switch. Bolt is great device! I think it better than 520 if you don’t mind to adjust to new interface and don’t use Varia devices

I’m a Garmin 520 user and agree that it’s not perfect. That said, there is one feature that it has that, as far as I know, the others do not which captures my loyalty. The integration it offers with my smartphone is terrific. I don’t have to stop and check the phone when I hear it ring or feel it buzz in my pocket because the Garmin is paired with it and shows me who is calling or texting right on the screen. It won’t perform any other phone-like functions but just seeing whether or not a call or text is important enough to stop and respond to is an enormous help on those weekday rides when I bolt out of the office for a quick loop.

Hi Scott, Thanks for your comment and contribution to the site. Actually, the BOLT delivers text messages and tells you who is calling from your address book too. These GPS devices are really amazing, especially when you consider how far they’ve come in such a short period of time. Steve

Just curious – if you go off track, I see you said you would return to where you went off & resume again. However, if a road is closed, or I know how to get back on — will the Elemnt resume the course, or because I’ve not been on the course, will it continue to tell me that I’m off track (even once I’m back on)? The turn-by-turn & stored route for offline mode is what I’m missing most – if you could talk to that a bit more.

I’m considering my first (serious) bike computer and between this, the 820 (I was holding out for the hammerhead to make a decision – but after many delays, still haven’t seen many reviews and don’t want to “hang on” another x months!)

Jay, once you get back to any part of the course, however you get there, the Elemnt will resume giving you directions. And in the same way it beeps at you when you go off course, it will beep when you get near the course again. Kind of like a Labrador whose owner has gone out and then returned from his ride. Steve

Great review, Steve – thank you for all of the detail.
Have you had any issues with the Bolt displaying inaccurate temperature and elevation readings?
I’ve tried three now, and each one of them displays the ambient temperature 3°C (close to 5°F) too low; like, it’ll be 22°C outside, but the Bolt is showing 19°C. It moves up/down as temp increases/decreases accurately, but it seems the set point is just plain wrong.

(I checked against five other temperature gauges – one bike computer that has always been accurate, two cars, two home weather stations- not to mention “what it feels like”, to confirm the inaccuracy of the temp readings on the units I tried.)

Mike, I haven’t had this issue with my Bolt but I can’t say that I have compared it the way you have. The temperature always seemed reasonable to me. Perhaps give Yahoo a call and ask them if they’ve heard similar things or if there is a way to calibrate your computer. Steve

A-freakin-men to this review and the decision to adopt the BOLT!! After my maiden voyage today w/it today, I was immediately: “Garmin who?? Oh yeah. Buh bye.” I still need to figure out TBT navigation – I didn’t get prompted early enough (or even correctly) on some turns, but I chalk that up to user error right now. Out of the box, it was 20 minutes to full set-up INCLUDING links and syncs to all my other 3rd party apps (Strava, RwGPS, Apple Health, etc.) Another joy? Never having to go back into Garmin Connect!

Long time Garmin user and mine old 510 just died in a rain storm. My initial take on your review is that Bolt is better but not by much considering I do not use many more complicated features. What I do like about the Garmin is that I sweat a lot and it is much easier to clean off. I didn’t see a whole lot about the touch screen feature on the Garmin as that eliminates some of the need for the buttons?

When you buy at many of these stores or anything through these links at eBay and Amazon, a small amount comes back to cover the review and site cost that go into creating the in-depth and independent, category-wide and ad-free, comparative and conflict-of-interest-free reviews you read here on In The Know Cycling.

If you prefer, you can also support this site by making a contribution here.